Allegations Of Welfare Fraud Raised Against Parents Of `Sarah`

September 25, 1991|By Rob Karwath.

A custody battle over a 7-year-old girl took a dramatic turn Tuesday when a state lawyer raised allegations of welfare fraud against the child`s biological parents.

A Cook County Juvenile Court judge immediately suspended questioning of the biological mother to give her lawyers time to review her state welfare file. The girl`s former foster parents, Joseph and Marjorie Procopio, are fighting with the biological parents over custody.

The fraud allegations are the most surprising development yet in the bitter tug-of-war over the girl, known by the pseudonym ``Sarah.`` If true, they raise serious questions about the biological parents, both of whom are former drug addicts and convicted felons who have testified that they have their lives under control and now can provide Sarah with a decent home.

Proof of fraud also would call into doubt the credibility of the biological parents` earlier testimony that they have put aside the deep anger they felt as recently as three weeks ago against the Procopios. The biological parents have said they are now willing to let Sarah visit the Procopios.

Sarah was taken from her mother at birth because the woman was a heroin and cocaine addict and a prostitute. The state placed her in the Procopios`

southwest suburban Bridgeview home.

But in 1989, when Sarah was 5, a Juvenile Court judge ordered her returned to the biological parents, who had told the judge that they had stopped using drugs. The judge also barred the Procopios from visiting Sarah. In April, however, the Illinois Appellate Court said the judge hadn`t ruled in Sarah`s best interests. The court ordered a new custody hearing and visits between Sarah and the Procopios.

The Procopios have since filed papers seeking to adopt Sarah. Since April, they have visited her once.

The welfare-fraud allegations were raised by Illinois Department of Public Aid lawyer James O`Connell, who appeared in court with the biological mother`s welfare file to answer a subpoena issued by the Procopios` lawyer.

The biological mother has testified that she doesn`t work and receives state food stamps and Medicaid health insurance for her and her four children, ages 17 to 2. She also receives a federal Social Security check, the result of her former husband`s death.

The biological father isn`t married to the mother but testified that he has lived with her for 12 years, the last three in a suburban home the woman and her mother bought.

The father also testified that, until he was laid off recently, he held a job as a door-installer and brought home a regular paycheck. The father now works part-time as a cook and receives unemployment insurance.

When O`Connell appeared in court with the welfare file, Associate Juvenile Court Judge Robert Smierciak asked him to surrender it. But O`Connell refused.

Asked why he wouldn`t turn over the documents, O`Connell stood and said,

``We believe they may contain evidence of possible criminal violations of the Public Aid code.``

O`Connell referred to possible ``overpayment`` of Public Aid benefits to the biological mother. He said the problem stemmed from ``failure to report the number of people in the family.``

Lawyers in Sarah`s case, who later received copies of the file, declined to discuss its contents. But the fraud allegations involve whether the biological mother failed to tell the state that the father was living with her and, until recently, bringing home a paycheck. That income could have reduced or ended the food stamps and Medicaid benefits the mother received.

The father has testified that neither he nor Sarah`s mother have tried to deceive the state so the mother can receive more welfare benefits.